COST OF BILLS

Evening Star, Issue 20614, 14 October 1930, Page 1

COST OF BILLS

INVESTIGATION MADE SPEEDING TIP LEGISLATION. Proposals to expedite the passing of private Bills and reduce the cost of car-' vying them through Parliament are contained in the report from the Select Committee on Private Bills (says the London ‘ Daily Telegraph 1 ), The committee submitted a new timetable, advancing the date fixed for the deposit of Bills and petitions against the Bill. Roughly, ninety-four Bills in every hundred are originally opposed.on their introduction into the House of Commons, but only fourteen to twenty Bills in every 7 hundred are fought before the committees in both Houses. With regard to the shortening of procedure before committees, the report stresses the importance of allowing the fullest possible time for preliminary negotiations. The committee are of opinion that the newspaper and * Gazette ’. notices should be shortened, and should be preceded by the deposit of the Bill in Parliament. Other alterations in procedure which thev recommend are that the interval between committal and the sitting of the commitee should be’abolished in the case .of unopposed Bills, and that the cojj.Ciioration stageshould be“aboh. I in the case of unamended railway, and tramway Bills. ■ STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE. The committee recommend that tho Standing Orders Committee should be reconstituted, and that Bills to amend the Public Health Acts should be introduced and passed' every five years. The- Minister of Health had proposed that some restriction might .be placed upon local authorities as to the period within which they might introduce Bills, but the committee feel that -it would be inexpedient to place a : barrier; of time in the way of local authorities’ access ,to Parliament, “ and are confident that local authorities are sufficiently mindful of their responsibilities not to promote legislation without adequate reasons for so doing." With regard to cost, it is stated that over 45 per cent, of the ordinary unopposed Bills cost less than £I,OOO, and only two cost over £4,000, . whereas ■ among unopposed local legislation Bills none cost less than £I,OOO, and two cost between £5,000 and £6,000. Among the Bills opposed in the first House only, none cost less than £2,000, 1 and two cost between £7,000 and £9,000, while of those opposed in both Houses three cost over £IO,OOO. These latter two classes contain both - local legislation and non-local legislation Buis. -it . It was found that an unopposed local legislation Bill costs on the average almost twice as much as an ordinary unopposed Bill, while opposition in one House trebled the cost. Opposition .m both Houses, however, did not double tho cost of opposition in one House only 7 . ... Cheaper methds of printing and re* porting are advocated, and tho committee suggest that the appointment of the Local Legislation Committee should be discontinued. Opposed Bills containing “local legislation” clause should be sent to committees on a group of private Bills and should when possible be grouped together. The committee do not consider that a sound continuity of policy would in any serious Tray be jeopardised by this change.